B V NARASIMHULU CHETTY Vs. RATAKONDA KRISHNA MURTHY

JUDGEMENT

(1.) The plaintiff is the appellant. He filed a suit for recovery of Rs. 21,852.35 ps., being the principal and interest due on a promissory note executed by defendants 1 and 2. The trial Court dismissed the suit, holding that the transfer of the suit promissory note in favour of the plaintiff is not valid and legal and not enforceable against the defendants 1 and 2.

(2.) The averments in the plaint are as follows : The plaintiff is a partner of the registered firm, Prakash Financiers. Defendants 1 and 2 borrowed from Prakash Financiers a sum of Rs. 15,000.00 in cash agreeing to pay the same with interest at 18% per annum and executed the suit promissory note. The suit promissory note was transferred in the name of the plaintiff by the managing partner of Prakash Financeirs on 17-3-1973. Subsequent to this transfer, the plaintiff demanded defendants 1 and 2 to pay the amount, but they evaded. Therefore, the suit is filed against defendants 1 and 2 to pay the amount, but they evaded. Therefore, the suit is filed against defendants 1 and 2 and also against the 3rd defendant, a receiver who is managing the properties of the family of defendants 1 and 2.

(3.) Defendants 1 and 2 filed a written statement. They admitted the execution of the suit promissory note, but added that it was by way of renewal of an earlier transaction. One of the plead taken in the written statement is that they are not award of the transfer of the suit promissory note in favour of the plaintiff and that the alleged transfer is not valid and legal and is not supported by consideration and that the plaintiff is not a bond fide holder-in-due course.